Americans benefit from the freest and most accessible medical care in the
world.
Gradually over the last fifty years, however, that care has become
increasingly hampered by government controls. The last traces of free-market
medicine could soon be gone -- replaced by the brutal intrusion of arbitrary
government power at both the state and federal levels.

The final result will likely not be a "socialized" system but a fascist one.
Politicians, most of whom love anything that expands the reach of government
and their own power, are drawn even more to the creation and manipulation of a
political spoils system that allows them to pay off their friends and punish
their enemies.

To that end, much political debate in recent years injects egalitarian
ideology into the discussion.

For example, Barack Obama, in his candidacy, advocated an increase in the
capital gains tax even though such hikes suppress economic activity due to
reduced capital investment, and decrease revenue to the government. He said he
supported the increases anyway -- because it would make taxes more "fair."

In other words: better that all be worse off than anyone be better off.

More recently, under the pretext of "equalizing burden" and preventing "salary
discrimination," Obamacare mandates that insurance premiums must be based on
the policyholder's income level -- forget the objective value of the services
covered or the health liability of the individual insured. But since the
actuarial nature of insurance and the realities of long-term cost management
cannot be ignored, the effect is that those with above-average incomes will be
subjected to inflated premiums relative to costs.

Note that this provision has not been highlighted in the avalanche of
advertising paid for by the government in its praise of Obamacare. These
tactics will further the demonizing of private insurance and facilitate the
end goal of imposing a single-payer system, under which services are not
supplied and priced according to what a competitive market will bear, but
rather by what an overbearing government agency will allow.
In fact, the powers of the new "Independent Payment Advisory Board" (IPAB) are
so intimidating, and their power to issue unpopular decrees so vast, that
Congress attempted to protect it by stating that any repeal or amendment of
that power must be ruled "not in order" by the presiding officer of the House
or Senate. This attempt to restrict the action of all future Congresses is of
course blatantly unconstitutional. And it reflects the willingness of the
authors to force all into submission to their agenda.

Perhaps the most immediately harmful application of egalitarianism to our
medical care will be the host of new agencies given powers to impose standards
of "comparative efficacy," "best clinical practices," and the power to "reduce
health disparities across health care disparity populations." Any new drug
that can improve or save your life can be forbidden if it does not benefit
everyone in the same way. The only hope in such cases is to belong to some
favored group.
The unique needs of individuals as determined by their physicians are now
irrelevant. Individuals will become disparities for which unique treatment is
without efficacy.

Many years ago, Winston Churchill, in response to complaints that the benefits
of capitalism were shared unequally, pointed out that the "virtue" of
socialism is its equal sharing of misery. The virtues of a capitalist medical
system -- the hallmark of which is to alleviate pain and suffering -- are
vanishing, in favor of a government system that is more effective at spreading
pain than healing it.

Our politicians are now a few steps away from the likes of Danton and
Robespierre. Individualism is the greatest threat to their status. We must
restore the principles of freedom and individualism to medical care at the
first opportunity.